LondonMix

Wow, this is truly crazy. Whoever signed this project off (including self certified trades) all need their professional certifications revoked. Southwark isn't always involved in building control-- some builders can use a private building control service. Our builder wanted to do this but I insisted we use Southwark and am glad we did as they made our builder redo piping, fire proofing, put in additional structural reinforcement and add access panels during his inspections. If Southwark actually signed off this construction, I'd be truly horrified. Once you figure out what you need and want, please let the rest of the community know how we can best support you. I imagine many would sign a petition asking both for accountability from those involved as well as guaranteed rehousing within a reasonable distance of the current scheme. The only silver lining is the problems have been discovered before someone was hurt as a result of the unsafe manner in which this project was constructed.

I remember they are planning to do a rear extension of the existing building across two levels, right? I think the use is already residential there though so its not a change of use. What's the precedent M&S is supposed to have created: buildings can be extended to create flats? Surely that was already the case and for Londis, they aren't changing the original height of the building as seen from LL are they? Can someone please re-link the planning application? Anyway, I find the term luxury flats really loaded. Its just more housing. Its not like they are building One Hyde Park above the shop. London needs more housing so unless there is a good reason not to do the residential extensions, I'm supportive.

What are you talking about Louisa? There was no change of use for M&S! Its one supermarket chain taking over another supermarket chain. The only change of use on that application concerns converting the office to residential units, which isn't part of the Londis application as far as I can see.

What on earth are you on about? How has M&S done anything to Londis? Also, if the idea that this is being developed for a chain, surely the chain would be involved in the design phase to make sure its appropriate.

Ah, interesting-- I was told it would be bigger but not from someone very trustworthy so...

I was in East Croydon the other day. I can't believe how much that place is changing. Biggest Westfield in London will be opening up soon so I'm not surprised they are prioritizing opening that location first.

When they announced the opening on Twitter they said it would be a long while before it opened. I'm not sure why. Perhaps they need to prepare planning documents or something. DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > HRE Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > When IS meatLiquor to open? > > No sign of any work going on there. Not in any > hurry for it to open.. > > DulwichFox

Its not a coffee shop. There is no ordering counter in the internal configuration which means its neither a fast food restaurant or a coffee shop but rather a restaurant like it says in the plans. I can't think of any high end chain restaurants besides Gaucho to be honest with you and even that has relatively few outlets. Mass chain restaurants by their very nature are mid-priced to reach a mass audience. I'd hate a giraffe or zizzi or pizza express. Not because they are chains but because the food is insipid. Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LM a nandos would accessible to the entire > community and I wouldn't personally have a problem > with them. However, if it is a high end chain > which is overpriced and aimed at a specific > affluent demographic I would have raise issue. We > have ample eating options at decent quality > indepedent restaurants locally (and some low brow > chains too), we do not need more restaurants which > will isolate part of the community. I wouldn't > object to a Pizza Express (despite my hatred for > the stuff) and I wouldn't have an issue with a > Giraffe or Zizzi type place. If it's a chain > coffee shop I will personally be campaigning > outside for its closure with leaflets distributed! > > > Louisa.

Louisa, what chain do you think could fit in the Londis site with the basement converted? Lord knows I'd love a Nandos! I'm not sure if that site will be a major chain or not-- my guess would be no based on the drawings. However, how the high street develops in ED will be a function of planning. Kingston became what it is because the planners allowed the wholesale transformation of the area by allowing major extensions of the existing retail buildings. That I would really be opposed to.

Louisa, I said flat out that the area's retail offering will become higher end. I just don't think its going to be higher end chains except where the retail units are large enough for them. ED Warehouse was always going to be large enough for a chain. Equally, Foxtons could be turned into a chain. However, the vast majority of units are far too small. They will become high end indies. The units that can be chains for the most part already are. Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The point about high end boutique chains is more > relevant to ED than large corporate chains such as > McDonalds. The ratio of indepedent stores to chain > boutiques has changed and will radically do so > even more now M&S are moving here. The Londis site > is a perfect case study example. I fail to > understand why people cannot acknowledge this > point? As the demographic changes, so does the > retail diversity. If high end chains cannot find > large spaces they will just open up smaller stores > (much the same way as they have done in Clapham's > Northcote RD). The consequence goes far beyond the > retail offering, it's a symptom not a cause. > > Louisa.

What's your point? I'm saying the McDonalds has been there during Peckham's un-gentrified state.

As an aside, I don't think children should be entirely sheltered from dull tasks (I don't mean when they are super young but just in general). So much of having a good work ethic is developing the discipline to concentrate and do what at times is dull work. Learning to feel a sense of reward from completing a task because its worth doing rather than because the task itself is fun is an essential life skill. Not developing these habits early on just stores up a very rude awakening when its time to enter the real world. I already see some of the fall out with young millennials entering the workforce now. Its not just work though- tons of aspects of being an adult are dull: preparing taxes, budgeting, setting up your savings and pension, organizing repairs, picking your insurances deal etc. Good god, just writing that list filled me with a bit of despair...

Exactly-- chains aren't a sign of gentrification. There are areas with lots of chains that are demographically poorer the Dulwich. Eltham comes to mind! In large retail units you get high end chains if the area is affluent and low end chains in areas that are poor. In small retail units (like those that dominate East Dulwich) you get high end small businesses or lowwer end small businesses. And some chains go where ever as long as there is space. Bath Hampstead Heath and Peckham have both had a McDonald's for ages (well before Peckham become more expensive). The only reason we don't have one is because they can't find an appropriately sized unit. rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the chain thing is a red herring, in terms > of being any indicator of 'gentrification'. There > are plenty of down at heal areas which have lot's > of chains, as well as very affluent ones with > none. > Rye Lane could not in any sense be said to be > 'gentrified'. Gentrifying perhaps, but's that's > different. > I don't really know what people want. to live in > an area which is solely 'working class' (however > that is defined)? Seems very insular to me. > This part of SE London is actually pretty diverse > on almost any measure and all the better for that.

I'd really like to hear the perspective of somebody who supports this boycott. I think there is a lot wrong with the government's approach to education but I find this campaign unclear. Reading about it, I can't tell if they don't like tests in general or if they simply don't like the form or difficulty level of the current tests? Standardized tests help monitor pupil progress and keep schools accountable for progressing children adequately so I personally support standardized tests. However, when testing should start and what balance of subjects there should be in the curriculum is more debatable in my view but there doesn't appear to be any coherent proposal being put forward about those issues.

Also, what you've said about NY isn't true. Most high end new construction is fitted with wood floors. Again, its a question of the sound proofing you install as an underlay. In period properties its very straight forward to install appropriate sound insulation. Both my flat and my current house are Victorian. cantthinkofaname Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No no no and no. > You will set yourself up for years of complaints > from the neighbours below. Period houses were not > meant to be flats, and so the footsteps will sound > like a deafening drum to those below. > In NYC it's illegal to have wooden floors if > people live below you.

We put down wood floors in our flat (we were on the second floor). Our lease said the same but we owned a share of freehold and luckily the neighbour below us was an architect and so understood that adequate sound proofing was entirely possible. He suggested he'd be happy if we laid down an Iso 200 mat as sound proofing. Our fitter recommended one that was thinner that also had a higher sound insulation called TimberTech HD Contract 5. After it was installed our neighbor actually said they heard us less than they did before on the vinyl flooring that was previously in the kitchen and living room. When we sold the flat and bought our house, we installed this same insulation again under the wood floors in the upstairs bedrooms and there is virtually no noise transfer. If you own your freehold, just speak to your neighbours. Its entirely possible to make it work. If they agree, you can just get a side letter agreed rather than varying the lease. Their consent in a side letter will suffice for future sales- we handled the arrangement via a side letter and there were no issues when we came to sell. Good luck.

Here is one that is good as both a gentle body wash and moisturising shampoo http://www.hollandandbarrett.com/shop/product/dr-bronner-unscented-babymild-pure-castile-soap-60004609

Google castile soap-- that is typically made with olive oil and is very gentle. Soaps like this tend to work best in soft water so you might need to use a filter

I do every week so speak for yourself. None of the shops I support have closed and thats as more to do with their great service and products than general goodwill for small business. Businesses have to provide a service and product people want.

That would be a disaster for so many reasons... rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Instead of a minimum wage, perhaps we ought to be > looking for a maximum wage (as a multiple of > average earnings for example). Dunno.

Pickle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I opened this expecting to see some kind of weird > 1am gathering of women with kids! Me too!

Is it legal to post videos of under age crime victims on line without their consent? I can't imagine it is. Rahrahrah- if you pm me the youtube link I'll contact the company so its taken down. rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I just checked, it's on You Tube. Pretty clear > that the police were having to battle with > 'spectators' to keep them back. :-(

I'd say give a bare bones fact reference. I'd save a negative reference for someone you really don't think anyone should ever give a chance to. We would only give an off the record negative references if someone is deranged / sexually harassing people etc. Everyone, typically has a 3 month probation period so you aren't burdening the company permanently with someone. I think millennials in general are a bit lazy anyway. They are definitely work shy. Saying someone his age lacks focus and professionalism these days is almost a tautology

That's really dreadful... kristymac1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jah Lush Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > An isolated incident. Move along. Nothing to > see > > here. > > Not according to the numerous people photographing > and videoing the scene, not just teenagers > 'grown-ups' too, even a mum with a little one in a > pushchair was straining to get a good angle for > her photo. Lowlife.

Hearblock-- I agree the governments policy is bad. All I was clarifying is that they do not want full elective non-emergency service 7 days a week as you indicated in your original post. They wanted emergency care andspecific diagnostic support that complements emergency care 7 days a week. The only problem I have with the policy is that the government won't be able to recruit the staff they need to make this plan work for the reasons I've already stated.